« Atlantis Heads To Space Station
Rush to Judgment: Talk Radio’s ‘Truth Detector’ Blows a Fuse—Again »
The Political Assassination of Greg Craig
The Obama administration’s approach was often likened to Abraham Lincoln’s “Team of Rivals,” coupled with vows of transparency and vows that an Obama administration would operate differently than George W. Busjh’s. But Steve Clemons, writing in The Daily Beast, suggests that the ouster of Greg Craig indicates such hopes have been dashed. Here’s how he starts his piece:
The White House counsel was done in by a scurrilous leaks campaign. So much for the Obama team’s pledge to be transparent, forthright and accountable for their actions.
Gregory Craig, White House counsel to President Obama and national security advisor to Obama during the presidential campaign, resigned his post this past Friday. But when rumors broke Thursday of his imminent departure, Craig had not written his farewell note and may not have planned to leave – yet.
Since the summer, word had been leaking that Greg Craig’s days were numbered and that Obama campaign legal counsel Bob Bauer would be moving in to take Craig’s spot. But the situation seemed similar to the leaks about National Security Adviser Jim Jones’ supposedly tenuous hold on his job—which were either untrue, or turned around by Jones’ performance. The leaks about Craig also seemed unfounded—especially in light of direct statements from the White House that the statements were untrue and that he was not departing.
Some observers are now calling this incident the Obama team’s first assassination by leak…
…The sustained nature of the leaks and—and the fact that they ultimately proved to be true—indicates something quite disappointing for anyone who had hoped that the Obama White House would operate more transparently and honestly than the Bush team had.
Who does he think was a key player in dumping Craig? Read it in full.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
11 Responses to “The Political Assassination of Greg Craig”
Welcome to reality kids, like all other Presidents, he is first a politician. He can't walk on water unless he sees the stones of polls or the rocks of populist opinion.
Well, for most, the honeymoon swoon has already subsided — and for some of us, was never there.
“often likened to Abraham Lincoln’s 'Team of Rivals'”
[snort] Who, besides Ken Burns, cares what someone like Doris Kearns Goodwin says about them?
Some of us have good vision, and X-ray eyes that see through bullshit and have from the start. And we know what good, rather than poor, descriptions are from others. While some such as I have said that the Obama team are a bunch of elitist lefty kids and pretty people “playing government” and “playing nation,” others such as I overheard today (Morici) used different words to say the same thing.
Obama and Geithner (Morici said; this is true for the others as well) have achieved one thing so far this year: looking good. They're great at “dressing up” and playing their roles, and at looking good. We await more, and success and achievements for the better for our nation and for us, someday. Maybe.
And what's below the top rung? More kiddies, each with “angles” or agendas of their own, none of whom are the angels that join Obama, who to fewer and fewer people now is still unreastically seen as the new Messiah.
And this (Craig's) is obviously not the first, nor is it going to be the last, departure.
Welcome to reality.
“Some of us have good vision, and X-ray eyes that see through bullshit and have from the start.”
Aha, they gotcha, some of their turds are wrapped in lead foil and will take more time to reveal themselves.
As tempting as it is… I'm leaving it alone.
“wrapped in lead foil and will take more time to reveal themselves”
Well, it didn't help to have them try to forcibly control the media and go overboard in suppressing dissent.
And for the metaphors:
As to the shielding-wrapping, that is an advantage to being at a next lower level or otherwise off the main part of the stage. And it's no surprise that there has been quite a bit of suspicion about the “czars” who have bypassed Congressional and other scrutiny, as well as staffers and others not in very top positions, and thus off the radar. Of course, that makes these people convenient sacrificial objects when needed …
And it's no surprise that there has been quite a bit of suspicion about the “czars” who have bypassed Congressional and other scrutiny, as well as staffers and others not in very top positions, and thus off the radar. Of course, that makes these people convenient sacrificial objects when needed …
And there is even less surprise that these same folks had NO suspicion of Bush “czars” and other staffers. Now that there is a Democrat in office, it is suddenly a huge issue. Typical. Just like the whole right-wing manufactured idea that Obama is anyone's idea of a “messiah”. I love that kind of logic. Right-wing pundits repeatedly say that left-leaning folks think Obama is the messiah. Left-leaning folks go, “No we don't”. Then when Obama disappoints, as all leaders do at times, the right-wing pundits jump up and down and say, “Ha! Ha! Stupid liberals! And you thought he was a MESSIAH!” And the left-leaning folks go, “No we didn't”. Political discourse in this country is honestly surreal.
“Now that there is a Democrat in office, it is suddenly a huge issue. Typical. “
That's not what's happening here, sadly. (Nor is what else you were saying. The personality cult and unchecked idealism associated with Obama's campaign were not seriously open to any question, for example.)
Agreed.
“Political discourse in this country is honestly surreal.”
Actually, it's petty as well as trivial right now. The sniping and counter-sniping about the civilian trial of the terrorists in New York (the PR stunt, with political inferences) has been upstaged right now by the bowing of Obama to a Japanese host. (At least when the Obamas visited the royal family in the UK, the sniping was more muted.)
The personality cult and unchecked idealism associated with Obama's campaign were not seriously open to any question, for example.
I beg to differ. Idealism is quite a bit different than thinking Obama is the “messiah”. I even worked on his campaign and I can honestly say that the “personality cult” is NOT even close to as wide spread as right wing media portrays. The conservative media would find the biggest kook they could, plaster them on the news, and then say, “See what cultists these Obama people are!” It was ridiculous.
“I beg to differ. Idealism is quite a bit different than thinking Obama is the 'messiah'”
I saw plenty of idealism and naivete' among the youth who were at the forefront of the earliest effort for Obama, in particular. (That included foreigners who came to Iowa, for example, and worked on his early campaign, at least.) However, there was a broader, larger phenomenon in effect, which nobody can honestly deny — it really was a personality cult and widespread “puppy love” among those in the media, for example (which I've correctly identified before) which lasted months after the election. The personality cult and “worship” of Obama was so blatant that even Saturday Night Live enjoyed humor about it.